Is It Safe to Carry a Handgun Fully Loaded?

[Annihilator]

Here is an article that we have talked about on here in several threads, is it safe to carry a loaded handgun

Is It Safe to Carry a Handgun Fully Loaded? - The Shooter's Log

One of the most frequently asked questions about carrying is whether it's safe to carry a handgun fully loaded. We'll cover what you should know right here.

blog.cheaperthandirt.com

 

[Bassbob]

The real question is
“Is it safe to carry a firearm if you’re an idiot”.

 

[KillerFord1977]

Since a bear attacked 2 hunters in a recent thread I posted, I would say the answer is a YES !!

 

[David N.]

I heard/read it somewhere that every gun is safe "as long as you keep your booger hook off the bang switch."

 

[somorris]

Good article Anni. Thanks.

 

[KLGunner]

“Carrying without one in the chamber is like telling yourself you have enough time to put on a seatbelt before an accident.” Life happens in the blink of an eye it’s always smartest to prepare for the worst case scenario and prey for the best case scenario.

 

[Lock n' Load]

With a striker fired semi auto, I think it's unsafe not to. Remember, in a life threatening incident, milliseconds count!

 

[wmg1299]

I can't see any danger in carrying a firearm in ready to fire condition (I do not care for the term "fully loaded") in a proper holster, so long as the carrier exercises the basic level of weapons awareness.

 

[Peglegjoe]

I like the seatbelt analogy - that's perfect.

I carry my Hellcat and my XD-s both, in kydex holsters with a round in the chamber. Triggers are protected but they're ready to go as soon as I draw.

 

[SCfromNY]

How many times do we go over this? Quickly just picture this: Someone is approaching you obviously with bad intent with a knife or other object. Your first instinct is to put out your hand to fend off an attack. How do you rack the slide?

 

[Peglegjoe]

My take on the article was a discussion of which types of firearms are physically safe to carry with a round in the chamber, as opposed to the theoretical discussion we have had here repeatedly. For example, older styles of revolvers without transfer-bar firing pins are UNsafe to carry as such, since a blow to the hammer from the outside could fire the round in the chamber since the firing pin (part of the hammer) sits in contact with the primer when the hammer is down.

 

[David N.]

My take on the article was a discussion of which types of firearms are physically safe to carry with a round in the chamber, as opposed to the theoretical discussion we have had here repeatedly. For example, older styles of revolvers without transfer-bar firing pins are UNsafe to carry as such, since a blow to the hammer from the outside could fire the round in the chamber since the firing pin (part of the hammer) sits in contact with the primer when the hammer is down.

I think this discussion is more relevant to semiautomatic handguns versus revolvers.

 

[Peglegjoe]

The article pointed out different types of handguns (revolvers included), and discussed the pros and cons of carrying any of them with a loaded chamber. The article did not discuss the theory of WHY you want to carry a gun with a loaded chamber, only what types of guns were physically safe to do so.

If you want to discuss theory, you are correct - it is more applicable to semiauto handguns. But the article did not discuss that - the article was about physical characteristics. Characteristics of both revolvers, and semiauto.

 

[David N.]

The article pointed out different types of handguns (revolvers included), and discussed the pros and cons of carrying any of them with a loaded chamber. The article did not discuss the theory of WHY you want to carry a gun with a loaded chamber, only what types of guns were physically safe to do so.

If you want to discuss theory, you are correct - it is more applicable to semiauto handguns. But the article did not discuss that - the article was about physical characteristics. Characteristics of both revolvers, and semiauto.

Thanks, Joe.

 

[TEXASforLIFE]

How many times do we go over this? Quickly just picture this: Someone is approaching you obviously with bad intent with a knife or other object. Your first instinct is to put out your hand to fend off an attack. How do you rack the slide?

With a revolver!

 

[ghosttwofive]

For a long time, I carried with an empty chamber, over the last year with some good examples and advice from some members on this forum, I always carry a round in the chamber now for all the reasons stated above.

 

[HansGruber]

My take on the article was a discussion of which types of firearms are physically safe to carry with a round in the chamber, as opposed to the theoretical discussion we have had here repeatedly. For example, older styles of revolvers without transfer-bar firing pins are UNsafe to carry as such, since a blow to the hammer from the outside could fire the round in the chamber since the firing pin (part of the hammer) sits in contact with the primer when the hammer is down.

Well, technically, if you carried an older SAA without a round under the hammer, you actually ARE carrying chambered, since it’s not the round under the hammer which is your first shot, as cocking the hammer rotates the cylinder.

All you are doing in that case is reducing your capacity by 1/6th...

 

[Peglegjoe]

Very true. And THAT was the point of the article - the physical reasoning behind having/not having one in the chamber, not the argument about the tactics of a chambered round versus racking one in when needed. But, it seems most people see the question posted in the title, and assume they know what the article is about...

 

[ifithitu]

When I leave my house/home and i'm carrying a semi auto I put one in the chamber before I walk out the door. I only carry my DA revolvers and they are fully loaded.